Talk:1587: Food Rule - Revision history

188.114.97.114: opinion

2016-02-05T03:57:05Z

opinion

Jojonete at 02:20, 18 October 2015

2015-10-18T02:20:43Z

Brettpeirce at 12:54, 15 October 2015

2015-10-15T12:54:22Z

Kynde at 21:26, 10 October 2015

2015-10-10T21:26:23Z

Kynde at 21:25, 10 October 2015

2015-10-10T21:25:16Z

198.41.235.101 at 19:47, 9 October 2015

2015-10-09T19:47:40Z

R0hrshach at 16:17, 9 October 2015

2015-10-09T16:17:03Z

StealMyCode: Added a comment.

2015-10-09T12:56:46Z

Added a comment.

141.101.98.159 at 12:45, 9 October 2015

2015-10-09T12:45:40Z

141.101.103.217 at 12:18, 9 October 2015

2015-10-09T12:18:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:57, 5 February 2016
Line 9:		Line 9:

	:::::::I completely agree. It briefly crossed my mind that a shrimp might have some kind of a face- it's entirely plausible that Randall needs to Google the face-ness of all three items. Really, it's the only conclusion that makes sense considering that this is how he set up the comic. Somebody should change the explanation back. [[User:Bbruzzo\|Bbruzzo]] ([[User talk:Bbruzzo\|talk]]) 15:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)		:::::::I completely agree. It briefly crossed my mind that a shrimp might have some kind of a face- it's entirely plausible that Randall needs to Google the face-ness of all three items. Really, it's the only conclusion that makes sense considering that this is how he set up the comic. Somebody should change the explanation back. [[User:Bbruzzo\|Bbruzzo]] ([[User talk:Bbruzzo\|talk]]) 15:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	::::::I disagree. There's a first time for everyone, so it's perfectly possible that right now there is a person that uses a food rule and doesn't know what an oyster even is (specially with over 7 billion people around). [[Special:Contributions/188.114.97.114\|188.114.97.114]] 03:57, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

	the most famous and vocal proponent of the "no food with a face" rule is sir paul mccartney. to which one wag replied that anyone would follow that rule if they'd done as much LSD as he had. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.34\|141.101.98.34]] 12:25, 7 October 2015 (UTC)		the most famous and vocal proponent of the "no food with a face" rule is sir paul mccartney. to which one wag replied that anyone would follow that rule if they'd done as much LSD as he had. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.34\|141.101.98.34]] 12:25, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:20, 18 October 2015
Line 71:		Line 71:
	:I have corrected this as well. --[[User:Kynde\|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde\|talk]]) 21:25, 10 October 2015 (UTC)		:I have corrected this as well. --[[User:Kynde\|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde\|talk]]) 21:25, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
	I wonder if he would have to Google whether or not wasps or cockroaches have faces(?) - they are invertebrates and thus would be excluded by that formation of the rule... but I certainly think of them as having faces, and would not feel the need to Google whether or not they have them...(?) -- [[User:Brettpeirce\|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce\|talk]]) 12:54, 15 October 2015 (UTC)		I wonder if he would have to Google whether or not wasps or cockroaches have faces(?) - they are invertebrates and thus would be excluded by that formation of the rule... but I certainly think of them as having faces, and would not feel the need to Google whether or not they have them...(?) -- [[User:Brettpeirce\|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce\|talk]]) 12:54, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	I'm 173.245.49.94, finally created an account. I've restructured everything one more time and I feel the order now is just about what it should be. I'm not sure everyone (or anyone, for that matter) will agree with my editing, but that's what "be bold" is about, right? Please, someone else reads it to check it's clear and correct and, if so, remove the incomplete tag. [[User:Jojonete\|Jojonete]] ([[User talk:Jojonete\|talk]]) 02:20, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:54, 15 October 2015
Line 70:		Line 70:
	--[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101\|198.41.235.101]] 19:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)		--[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101\|198.41.235.101]] 19:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
	:I have corrected this as well. --[[User:Kynde\|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde\|talk]]) 21:25, 10 October 2015 (UTC)		:I have corrected this as well. --[[User:Kynde\|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde\|talk]]) 21:25, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
		+	I wonder if he would have to Google whether or not wasps or cockroaches have faces(?) - they are invertebrates and thus would be excluded by that formation of the rule... but I certainly think of them as having faces, and would not feel the need to Google whether or not they have them...(?) -- [[User:Brettpeirce\|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce\|talk]]) 12:54, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 I think the heated discussion about whether or not something might need googling is quite powerful evidence that it might… [[User:StealMyCode|StealMyCode]] ([[User talk:StealMyCode|talk]]) 12:56, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
-:I now agree, and have corrected for this...
+:I now agree, and have corrected for this... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 21:26, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 "These animals do not have a skeleton".

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 : I fully agree.  [[Special:Contributions/141.101.66.23|141.101.66.23]] 11:14, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 : I also agree. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 For those of you who want to do a rewrite, here's one more topic: Randall should not be the subject of the actions. He's the author of the comic, yet the comic should be seen as entirely fictional. So the discussion is not about whether "Randall would google this or that" but "One would google this or that" -- it's not specifically about what Randall would do but what would someone do if they followed these rules, it should be turned into a more anonymous/generic subject. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 16:47, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
@@ Line 63: / Line 64: @@
 I think the heated discussion about whether or not something might need googling is quite powerful evidence that it might… [[User:StealMyCode|StealMyCode]] ([[User talk:StealMyCode|talk]]) 12:56, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 "These animals do not have a skeleton".
 Shrimp and clams have skeletons.  Specifically they have exoskeletons.  Squid on the other hand do not have a skeleton in any meaningful way.
 --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 19:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:47, 9 October 2015
Line 63:		Line 63:

	I think the heated discussion about whether or not something might need googling is quite powerful evidence that it might… [[User:StealMyCode\|StealMyCode]] ([[User talk:StealMyCode\|talk]]) 12:56, 9 October 2015 (UTC)		I think the heated discussion about whether or not something might need googling is quite powerful evidence that it might… [[User:StealMyCode\|StealMyCode]] ([[User talk:StealMyCode\|talk]]) 12:56, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	"These animals do not have a skeleton".
		+	Shrimp and clams have skeletons. Specifically they have exoskeletons. Squid on the other hand do not have a skeleton in any meaningful way.
		+
		+	--[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101\|198.41.235.101]] 19:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 I don't think this has anything to do with whether an item actually has a face or not. I think that is a red herring brought on by the fact that the comic caption sounds very ''similar'' to the rule about not eating anything with a face. Randall's list of approved food items clearly are in the "face" and "no face" category alike. Thus we can conclude that Randall is ok with eating things that have a face, eating things without a face, eating things considered non-Kosher, eating carnivorous, eating vegetables, eating fruits, etc... In fact, we derive from this list that Randall has a very large array of food that is considered ok to eat. Thus his caption makes sense only when paired with the title text. Essentially, Randall doesn't eat food that creeps him out. Notice the caption states, "if I have to Google to figure out" which leads me to believe he considers that food to be other-worldly or creepy. This coincides with the title text about being creeped out by the specter of such a being.--[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 15:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 :The explanation says quite clearly what you wrote in the first lines. I agree with it of course as I have been part of writing just that already... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
+::Except that your comment to me is almost a day after my comment to the board. At the time of my comment the explanation was haphazard and rambling and was different than when you saw it. Reading the explanation today I still think it is missing the point. Too much focus on Randall contemplating what makes a face. I think it comes down to food that is recognizable. Just my opinion.--[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 16:17, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 I think the currently explanation misses the point entirely. Two common 'food rules' are "Don't eat anything with a face" and "Don't eat anything you have to Google" (which would rule out, for example, pork and azodicarbonamide, respectively). The comic is funny because it mixes the two, which is ridiculous. The title-text is funny because it does this again with two more food rules ("Don't eat anything you would have to fight" and "Don't eat anything with a skeleton"). [[User:Jtg007|Jtg007]] ([[User talk:Jtg007|talk]]) 19:20, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:56, 9 October 2015
Line 61:		Line 61:
	:It gets a bit unwieldy to say "pisco-ovo-lacto-vegtarian", but I tend to assume (before I can confirm) that someone who says they're a "''foo-''vegetarian" eats vegetables, grains, fruit and ''foo'', but not meat nor whichever of fish/eggs/milk isn't already covered by the ''foo-''. It generally works out Ok.		:It gets a bit unwieldy to say "pisco-ovo-lacto-vegtarian", but I tend to assume (before I can confirm) that someone who says they're a "''foo-''vegetarian" eats vegetables, grains, fruit and ''foo'', but not meat nor whichever of fish/eggs/milk isn't already covered by the ''foo-''. It generally works out Ok.
	:However, there are other opinions as to the definition, so it's still good to check. Please feel free to meet me to talk about your own proclivities. You'll find me easy to get on with. I am, of course, a humanitarian... nom nom nom [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.159\|141.101.98.159]] 12:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)		:However, there are other opinions as to the definition, so it's still good to check. Please feel free to meet me to talk about your own proclivities. You'll find me easy to get on with. I am, of course, a humanitarian... nom nom nom [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.159\|141.101.98.159]] 12:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	I think the heated discussion about whether or not something might need googling is quite powerful evidence that it might… [[User:StealMyCode\|StealMyCode]] ([[User talk:StealMyCode\|talk]]) 12:56, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:45, 9 October 2015
Line 58:		Line 58:

	I believe that a "vegetarian" diet excludes all animal products, and "vegan" refers to people who also avoid every animal derived product, such as leather on belts or shoes or purses. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.103.217\|141.101.103.217]] 12:18, 9 October 2015 (UTC)		I believe that a "vegetarian" diet excludes all animal products, and "vegan" refers to people who also avoid every animal derived product, such as leather on belts or shoes or purses. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.103.217\|141.101.103.217]] 12:18, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
		+	:Definitions seem to change across time and between people (hence the need for terms such as "ovo-vegetarian" to better explain "Yes, I do still eat eggs!") but the trend I'm most familiar with is that (plain, unqualified) "vegetarians" just do not ''eat meat'', whilst "vegans" avoid all products of animals (whether derived by slaughter or obtained non-fatally) for both eating and (where avoidable) other uses like clothing. But there's plenty of scope betwixt/beyond the two to rule in/out the likes of milk, eggs, wool, leather- according to personal sensibilities and principles. i.e. There's those who just don't want animals to be slaughtered (to provide their own diet, at least), and others who don't even want to support the whole animal husbandry system, if they can at all help it.
		+	:It gets a bit unwieldy to say "pisco-ovo-lacto-vegtarian", but I tend to assume (before I can confirm) that someone who says they're a "''foo-''vegetarian" eats vegetables, grains, fruit and ''foo'', but not meat nor whichever of fish/eggs/milk isn't already covered by the ''foo-''. It generally works out Ok.
		+	:However, there are other opinions as to the definition, so it's still good to check. Please feel free to meet me to talk about your own proclivities. You'll find me easy to get on with. I am, of course, a humanitarian... nom nom nom [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.159\|141.101.98.159]] 12:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:18, 9 October 2015
Line 56:		Line 56:

	Because he used the word "spooky" I have to believe that he is referencing spooky scary skeletons/skeleton trumpet/mr skeltal etc --[[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.89\|199.27.133.89]] 03:15, 9 October 2015 (UTC)		Because he used the word "spooky" I have to believe that he is referencing spooky scary skeletons/skeleton trumpet/mr skeltal etc --[[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.89\|199.27.133.89]] 03:15, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	I believe that a "vegetarian" diet excludes all animal products, and "vegan" refers to people who also avoid every animal derived product, such as leather on belts or shoes or purses. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.103.217\|141.101.103.217]] 12:18, 9 October 2015 (UTC)